Mitch Lewis

A state of schism exists within the United Methodist Church, and perhaps that’s not all bad.

For decades we have been divided on a number of issues, one of which is the sinfulness of homosexual conduct. Our General Conference has consistently decided to adhere to the historic and ecumenical Christian standard: homosexual conduct is incompatible with Christian teaching and those who engage in it will not serve as pastors. A vocal minority of the church disagrees with this standard and refuses to accept the decision of General Conference.

The covenant that binds us together has been coming apart at the seams for quite some time; now the fabric of our covenant may be irrevocably torn. A group calling itself the “Church Within a Church”  has taken it upon itself to ordain two individuals – one a partner in a homosexual marriage - who were not offered ordination within the United Methodist Church. The ordinations took place in Baltimore on October 19, 2008. You can read more at:

• The Baltimore Sun
• United Methodist Portal
• Reconciling Ministries Blog
• The Institute for Religion and Democracy

“Extraordinary ordination” is schismatic act. Under United Methodist law, the right to ordain belongs only to the Annual Conferences and the bishops, and then only when acting in accordance with the rules and procedures outlined in the Book of Discipline. With this act of ordination, the Church Within a Church has become a Church Outside the Church. United Methodists should understand this. Extraordinary ordination is how Methodists came to separate from the Church of England.

Read the rest of this entry »

One approach to Biblical interpretation involves trajectories. As we look at the entire biblical text, what threads run from beginning to end and how do these themes develop over time? How do we see God’s people move ever closer to God’s intention as the story of the Bible unfolds?

With the issue of slavery, for example, we find the people of God coming on the stage of history in a world in which slavery is universally practiced. The people of God themselves practice slavery at first, but then fall into slavery in Egypt. God liberates them from bondage, changing their perception on slavery forever. The revealed law permits slavery (especially of non-Israelites), but limits it and controls it. Nevertheless, the people of God continue to exploit their neighbor’s poverty and force the weak e them into slavery. The prophets denounce this, and God allows his people once to fall into bondage once again. And then once again, he liberates them. In the New Testament, we find Jesus proclaiming release to the captives with the words of the prophets. Christians adopt the word “slave” for themselves and Paul teaches masters to treat slaves as brothers. Paul proclaims, in fact, that there is neither slave nor free in Christ. The arc of this trajectory, it is observed, ends naturally in the elimination of slavery altogether.

Applying that same principle of interpretation to sexual ethics, however, reveals something quite different. If the Bible’s arc with regard to “slavery” leads to ever greater freedom, the “sexual ethic” arc leads to ever greater self-control and restraint.

Read the rest of this entry »

The financial turmoil of 2008 has brought forth a lot of finger-wagging and tut-tutting from my fellow Methodist preachers.

Some of them have used the crisis as an opportunity to remind Christians that they cannot serve God and mammon - that where their treasure is, their heart will be also - that moth and rust destroy and thieves steal the treasures we lay up on earth, but there is a treasure in heaven that no thief can steal - that there is no need to be anxious about life, food or clothing, for the Father knows that we need these things, but we are to seek first God's kingdom and God's righteousness, and all these things will be given us as well. Point well made. These are certainly important things to remember in both good economic times and bad.

Most of the preachers, however, can't resist pointing their words at the usual suspects - capitalism, consumerism, business owners, corporations and their executives - and accuse their ideological opponents of greed, malice, callousness and all sorts of other vices. For some reason, many Methodist preachers seem to think that a liberal seminary education makes them experts in economics. Perhaps the majority are just following the example of John Wesley, who seemed to have a high opinion of his own opinion, no matter what the topic. See, for example, "The Cause and Cure of Earthquakes," in which Mr. Wesley tells us that earthquakes are punishment for sin. I personally think the theory of plate tectonics offers a better explanation.

Read the rest of this entry »

I freely admit that I am the beneficiary of unearned and undeserved privileges by accident of birth.

I benefited from being born to parents who took their marriage and family commitments seriously, giving me a loving and stable home in which to grow up.

I benefited from being born to a father who went to school part-time to get a college degree – and qualify for a better job – while he worked to support his family. I benefited from the fact that he was talented, diligent and trustworthy in his work, enabling him to advance in his career and provide the family with all of its material needs.

I benefited from being born to a father who came home at night, didn’t get drunk, didn’t tomcat around and didn’t give us a knuckle sandwich when he got mad. I benefited from being born to a father whose character and faith continued to mature throughout his life and set a good example for me as a man.

I benefited from being born to a mother who cared for our family and our home, ensuring that we had good food on the table, a clean and wholesome environment in which to live and exposure to some of life’s most enriching experiences. I benefited from being born to a mother who insisted that we be responsible for our actions, help around the house, keep things tidy and follow the family rules.

I benefited from being born with an extended family that played a significant role in my upbringing and helped shaped my life experiences.

I benefited from being born to parents who expected a lot from me, but who also gave me a lot of freedom and respected my individuality. I benefited from being born to a family that valued education.

Other families may structure themselves differently, but this is the way ours worked, and I benefited greatly from it. It was an unearned, undeserved privilege of my birth.

Read the rest of this entry »

On October 16, 2008 PBS will broadcast "Soldiers of Conscience," a documentary on how soldiers wrestle with the moral issues surrounding the use of lethal force. PBS follows eight soldiers in the current conflict, some of whom chose to engage the enemy and some of whom refused. In its preview for the program, PBS makes what I consider to be a very true statement: all soldiers are "soldiers of conscience."

I have not seen the program. I don't know who these soldiers are, much less what we will learn about the specifics of their moral reasoning processes. Consequently, none of the comments that follow are a reaction to the specifics of the program or to the decisions made by any particular soldier. What I want to discuss is one particular phrase in PBS' program promotion that started me thinking.

Soldiers, PBS says, are "torn between the demands of duty and the call of conscience." Based on the theme of the program, one presumes "the demand of duty" is killing and the "call of conscience" is not killing.

This way of describing the issue is problematic on two fronts. First, it presents the issue as a conflict between external demands ("duty") and an internal call (the voice of "conscience"). Doing one's duty is also a matter of conscience; the word "duty" itself implies a moral "ought." Failing to do one's duty should give one an uneasy conscience. Duty and conscience are intimately related.

More significantly, what if - when you come face-to-face with an armed sociopath rampaging through the halls of a school or an insurgent about to bomb a marketplace - what if that voice in your head telling you not to pull the trigger is not the moral voice of conscience, but simply a programmed response that emerged over the long course of human biological evolution?

Read the rest of this entry »

[Revised & bumped from October 2006]

Veterans Day is observed on November 11 each year on the anniversary of the armistice that ended World War I. Traditionally, a moment of silence is observed at the 11th hour of the 11th day of the 11th month. And while the nations of the British Commonwealth remember their war dead on November 11 (Remembrance Day in the UK, Canada and Australia), we Americans do that on Memorial Day in May. In the United States, Veterans Day is an occasion to thank the living more than it is a day to remember the dead.

The United Methodist General Board of Discipleship has some suggestions about the observance of Veterans Day in churches. It emphasizes the fact that Veterans Day is primarily a civic observance, not a Christian liturgical one. It suggests participation in community-wide ceremonies or interfaith services as the primary venue for elaborate celebrations. The article suggests: "If churches are going to honor and give thanks for veterans, their observances should be in a context of prayer and in the concerns and prayers. Churches should not turn the entire service into a rehearsal of our national concerns." All of this is good advice.

I serve a military congregation on a military installation, and OUR worship on Veterans Day weekend will not be "all veterans, all the time." The city of Leavenworth, Kansas - home of the Army's Fort Leavenworth - annually holds what it claims is the "largest Veterans Day parade west of the Mississippi." Old soldiers stuff themselves into the uniforms of another era and parade next to bands, floats, funny cars, fire engines and assorted militaria.  It is not, obviously, a religious event. The focus is on thanking all veterans for their service, and the whole county turns out. When I served at Fort Leavenworth, I would see many of the same soldiers and family members at the parade that I would see at chapel on Sunday. At the parade, we waved the flag and thanked the veteran. At chapel, God - and not the veteran - was the focus of our worship. There is a time and place for waving the flag, and a time and place for kneeling at the cross.

Read the rest of this entry »